Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38196972›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2024

Posterior Lateral Arthrodesis as a Treatment Option for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Safety and Early Clinical Outcomes.

Anuj Shah, Jonathan M Hagedorn, Usman Latif, Ashley Bailey-Classen, Nomen Azeem, Douglas P Beall, Pankaj Mehta, Chad Stephens, Larry Khoo, Timothy Ray Deer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Revision surgical technique for laterally placed MinuteManJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Anuj ShahDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, MI, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-0527-5162
Jonathan M HagedornDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1039-8166
Usman LatifDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Kansas Health System, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5683-5547
Ashley Bailey-ClassenTrinity Pain Medicine Associates, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Nomen AzeemFlorida Spine & Pain Specialists, Riverview, FL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6609-5976
Douglas P BeallComprehensive Specialty Care, Edmond, OK, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8340-696X
Pankaj MehtaPain Specialists of Austin and Central Texas Pain Center, Austin, TX, USA.
Chad StephensNoble Pain Management and Sports Medicine, Southlake, TX, USA.
Larry KhooThe Spine Clinic of Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Timothy Ray DeerThe Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8907-7730
Detroit Medical Center · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USThe Spine Institute · USThe Spine & Nerve Centers of the Virginias · USUniversity of Kansas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common condition caused by degenerative changes in the lumbar spine with age. LSS is caused by a variety of factors, including degenerative spondylosis and spondylolisthesis. People suffering with LSS experience neurogenic claudication, which causes severe physical limitations, discomfort, and a decrease in quality of life. Less invasive procedures are now being researched to improve the prognosis, success rate, and safety of LSS treatments. Posterior lateral spinal arthrodesis (PLSA) is a new surgical treatment for LSS. This study looks at the procedural and patient safety of PLSA. Materials and methods: This study is a multicenter retrospective analysis of the safety of PLSA who met the clinical indications for PLSA and underwent the procedure at eight interventional spine practices. Data was collected on demographical information, pre-procedural numeric rating scale score (NRS), post-procedural NRS, and complication reporting. Patients who were included had LSS with or without spondylolisthesis and had failed conservative treatments. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed to report the outcomes. Results were reported as mean and standard deviations for continuous outcomes, and frequency (%) for categorical outcomes. Results: This retrospective analysis involved 191 patients and 202 PLSA implants. The majority of patients were male Caucasians with a mean age of 69.2 years and a BMI of 31.1. A large majority of implants were placed at the L4-5 level, and the average pre-procedural NRS was 6.3 while the average post-procedural NRS was 3.1, indicating a 50.8% reduction in pain (p < 0.0001). Two patients reported complications, but they were unrelated to the device or surgical procedure; no infections, device malfunctions, or migrations were reported in the patient cohort. Conclusion: Preliminary results with PLSA implants indicate that it is a safe treatment option for patients with moderate LSS who do not respond to conservative management.

Indexed as

interspinous fusionlumbar spinal stenosisMinutemanposterior lateral spinal arthrodesisspinal simplicityspondylolisthesis

Identifiers

PMID38196972
PMCPMC10775691
OpenAlexW4390614801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.